Volume 6 - Number 42 | October 27, 2008
Recent Issues
EDITOR'S NOTES | Issue 6-42
As a general rule, thoroughness on a job is a commendable practice. But, there is such thing as going overboard. A roadway contractor hired for a paving project, agreed to perform 15 exploratory excavations to protect underground utilities (as required by the contract). When the number of excavations approached 100 digs, the contractor submitted a claim for the cost of the extra work. However, because the contract limited the compensation to the initial 15 excavations, anything in addition to that – even if it was necessary to ensure that the project did not interfere with the subsurface infrastructure – was extra-curricular to the contract and therefore, not compensable.
Work scope was also the subject of a dispute between a government contractor and the Department of Defense. On the indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract, installation of a fire alarm system was not part of the original contract. As such, the contractor could claim the cost of the work separate from the rest of the contract.
And finally, an Ohio town got a lesson in civic policy after the citizens’ petition to rescind a contract awarded by the city council was denied by the state high court.
CONTRACTOR CLAIMS FOR EXTRA WORK AND HIGHER UNIT PRICE DENIED
When a contractor goes above and beyond the contract specifications for exploratory excavation, it cannot collect compensation for the extra work.
DIRECTIVE EXCEEDED SCOPE OF INDEFINITE QUANTITY TASK ORDER
Contract discrepancies heat up between a contractor and the Department of Defense over the requested installation of a fire alarm system that was outside the scope of the contract.
CONTRACT AWARD CANNOT BE CHALLENGED BY PETITION
A citizen petition to reverse a city council’s contract award meets with failure at the state’s high court level. The council’s decision must be legislative, not administrative, for a petition to carry weight.
